accelerator_search

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own — no result-set size, pagination, ranking, or fallback behavior when filters match nothing — leaving it essentially redundant with the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence, zero filler, filters front-loaded after the verb and resource. Nothing is padded or repeated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With a full input schema, complete annotations, and an output schema covering return values, the description is nearly sufficient for a simple read-only search. The remaining gap is routing guidance versus adjacent startup-programming tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and all three parameters are documented there, including the non-obvious exclusion semantics of free_only. The description only restates 'sector, cost, and location' and adds no format, matching, or defaulting detail, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Search) and a specific resource (UAE accelerators and incubators) plus the filterable facets (sector, cost, location). An agent can tell it is a directory lookup distinct from vc_list or grant_programs by resource alone, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and never mentions alternatives such as vc_list, grant_programs, or dcde_programs, which an agent might plausibly confuse for startup-support searches. Usage is only implied by the word 'Search'.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.